FARMERS AND POLITICS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1764, 2 June 1906, Page 3

FARMERS AND POLITICS.

PRESIDENT’S SENSATIONAL SPEECH.

FORCE TO RESIST LEGISLATION CONSIDERED UNJUST.

,(Fer Fltu Aaaocixtlcn.;) Auckland, last night At the Farmers’ Union Conference . tiday Mr 0. B. Phillips, president, said to had been stated that tbo Farmers’ Union should abstain from poiitios. This oould not be tbe advice of a friend, as it was absolutely necessary that they should take an interest in politics, not party poiitios, but farmers’ poiitios. Aay one who said that the Farmers’ U Ron was an Opposition organisation, and was being used to -oust the present Government, was saying , wbat was not true. Toey had always put their views properly and clearly before the Government, and had kept away from parly feeliog. The. speaker then referred to tbe question of adopting the parliamentary franchise for loan polls and oounty and road * board elections. Upon this question they must pass strong resolutions, and inform . the Government that they were strongly opposed to the step, and if it was passed they would have to oonsider. what other measures they would have to take to protect themselves; If they oould not prevent euoh a measure passing through the House of Representatives they would have to use their strength of band and trueness of spirit to protect what they believed to be right. If it ever became law farmers would be perfectly justified in resorting to force .to prevent it from .beiog carried out.; (Applause.) The farmers were the manhood of the oolony, and surely they were not going to allow their manhood to be crushed by an aot of Parliament. (Applause.) He said this, speaking with a full sense of his position. (Applause.)' Later Oh Mr FlanigaD, of the Drury branob, moved, 11 Seeing the political aotivity of.all organisations in the townß it is desirable that farmers should give more attention to politics.” Mr Phillips said there were three questions upon whioh farmers, no matter which party they favoied, were agreed, and those were option of the freehold, revenue tariff, and tbe restriction of the franchise for loan proposals and the election of road boards and oonnty councils to ratepayers. The suggestion was that the Farmers’ Union should support a patty (separate from the present parties) bound to these principles. They Bhould oppose any party who would not give them the three tbingß they wanted. The motion was carried, aod it was also resolved that this meetiDg of farmers strongly protests against the proposal of

. . the Government to extend the local franohise, and pledges itself to resist by every means in its power the threatened attempt to give voting powers to nonpayers.